It's A Case Of `Done Dirty By A Bank'

MARCOVITZ

March 23, 1992|by HAL MARCOVITZ, The Morning Call

I'd like to share with you a letter I received recently.

"Dear Sir:

"Our client has requested that we contact you regarding your check for school pictures, which was returned unpaid by your bank. We realize this could be an oversight on your part; however, writing a check without sufficient funds in your account could have serious consequences. To avoid any possible misunderstanding, payment should be sent immediately to our office."

The letter was written by a collection agency in Minnesota.

Before anybody gets the idea I'm a deadbeat, let me explain what happened.

A few months ago I decided to close an account at my bank. When I went in to close the account, the bank told me there was an outstanding check and I should leave funds in the account to cover the payment. The bank also said I should leave in some money to cover that month's service charge.

The check was for $4.75. It had been made out to a photographer who had taken a picture of my daughter's kindergarten class.

Problem was, though, that the bank had given me the wrong amount to leave in the account. (You may have an idea now why I had decided to close my account there.) So what happened? The check bounced, of course.

And even though I sent the photographer a new check for $4.75 when I learned the earlier check was returned, he still turned the account over to a Minnesota collection agency, which sent me a nasty letter.

In fact, the collection agency sent me three nasty letters.

The second letter said, "If you continue to avoid payment, you will

leave us no choice but to seek other means of collection."

The third letter said, "Previous attempts to secure payment have proven unsuccessful. We have to believe you are intentionally disregarding our notices and avoiding your responsibility. Remit payment immediately to avoid consequences of this action."

There's more. The collection agency not only wanted $4.75 for the photographer, but it wanted another $15 to cover its costs.

See what happened? Because somebody (not me) goofed, the photographer wanted $4.75, the collection agent wanted $15 and the bank (which had made the goof) wanted $25 for a return check charge.

I am pleased to report that I did get it all straightened out. I had to go back to my old bank to get it to retract the $25 return check charge, which the bank did after I got nasty. Then, I had to write to the collection agency explaining what happened. I included photocopies of bank statements and canceled checks. The collection agency eventually wrote back -- this time with a bit more pleasant tone in its letter -- thanking me for my attention to the matter.

Nevertheless, it was a lot of heartburn and tangles over one lousy check for $4.75 that I didn't bounce in the first place!

By now I'm sure you have guessed what I've been getting at.

That's right. Bucks County Congressman Pete Kostmayer, House Speaker Tom Foley, Minority Leader Newt Gingrich, Defense Secretary Dick Cheney and all the other 355 present and former deadbeats in Congress never got three nasty letters from a collection agency when they bounced their checks -- even though they were bona fide true check bouncers.

And some of them bounced hundreds of checks.

"We've been double-crossed and done real dirty by this bank," Pete Kostmayer complained to Time magazine last week.